PT23.S1.G2 - fu, gunsel, jackson, kowalski, lee, mayer and ordoveza

emgeesea

https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-23-section-1-game-2
I watched the explanation for this game and am struggling with why in the set up you can not assume that HIRED equals INTERVIEWED (i.e., that they are interchangeable terms), since interviewing is a required condition for hiring?

I interpreted the corresponding rules to be just attempting to confuse me and depicted all hires as, by default, interviewed in my rules interpretation, e.g., I interpreted rules 4 and 5 to be combined as: F-K-M (if F then K then M). But clearly this does not work in the execution of the game!!!

Why is this not a valid interpretation?

runiggyrun

Hi @emgeesea you can't use hired and interviewed as interchangeable because not all the people interviewed get hired. Some probably mess up badly in their interview and don't get the job.
All the people hired are interviewed, but not all the people interviewed are hired. There's an extra step of not messing up the interview.
In the rules you mention, K being interviewed only gets triggered if F is hired. If F is interviewed but not hired, the rule doesn't trigger.
M being interviewed gets triggered only if K is hired. If K is interviewed but not hired, the rule doesn't trigger.
So, you can't link those two rules because if you do, you're assuming that K got the job, and we don't know that.
Fh-->Ki
Kh-->Mi

emgeesea

Got it, thanks.